Just Posted: Nikon D4 Studio Test Samples

We've just published images of our standard test scene taken with Nikon's latest professional DSLR, the 16MP D4. These have been shot using a production-standard D4 and, as usual, include both Raw and JPEG images with all original files available for download. Added them to our comparison tool means they can be called-upon from other reviews or the standalone comparison tool. For this test we used the recently-announced Nikon AF-S Nikkor 85mm f/1.8 and we'll be publishing 'real world' galleries from both the D4 and 85mm in the coming days.

Does anyone know when D800 and D4 will be avaliable regularly? I've heard these camera will not be regularly on the market until 2013. I need know that, cause I plan go to USA, just to buy one of them, in my vacation (August). But if these camera will not be available B&H, Adorama, Ritz, Best Buy, Amazon, I don't go to USA.

I am frustrated, several days ago I checked the same test and D4's samples were a bit darker, today they have identical exposition than D3s one, did the Dreview replaced D4 sample shots ? PS Now D4 looks better that 2 days ago !!!

I personally think extra high but excellent ISO range will be more useful for amateurs (ahem, like me) than extra high resolution, which i think is more suitable for professionals or those who like studios...

I use the Canon 550D...but its quite 'impossible' to use 60 fps video in low light situation, without all the noise dancing around the screen everywhere...my kit lens almost limit me to 30 or 24 fps video..and using a nifty fifty would severely reduce the FOV...

Hope they will reduce the resolution and make ISO 204 800 as clean as my 3200 soon...then wow, my f3.5 kit lens can be turned into an f1.2 prime!

The more I use the Studio shot comparison the more smile I get when comparing cams not necessarily in the same class ...OK, it' s studio ... but it's fun to see tat 1k $ lower price sometimes have better or practically the same IQ.... The same stands for weight and sometimes sensor size...

D3s and D4 show very similar results. Their FF sensor is much better than any APS-C sensor.Consequence:I need a camera with FF sensor, but a cheap one, I mean like max. USD 1500 for the body. Who is going to bring it?

It's not going to happen... (i'd like one too!) A used 5D mark I is not going to be better than a new top shelf APS-C for low ISO, DR, resolution, etc.If you want it for the DOF control, then yes, but that's another thing, and even then you'll need to use primes if you want to be able to say "you can't do this with any APS-C camera".

I have been a Pro for over 30yrs.. Fighting over if canon or Nikon is better. Is like saying a Lamborghini is better than a ferrari..?... They are both top notch. It's personal. Over the years I have found that Canon might be a little better on the portrait side and Nikon is a little better on the sports action side, But that is just Me.... Shoot what You like... They will make more...Just keep shooting....

I think the DPR comments are heading in to a new territory. Fanboys and trolls annoy me as much as they annoy the next man (and that's a LOT), but I do genuinely value the honest analysis of educated photographers when faced with these image samples, partly because I don't always trust my own eyes the first time round. Also, my experience is limited and the consensus of the more reasonable-sounding posters is actually useful to me as a (small) part of my decision making. To those of you who bemoan the Nikon/Canon war, I totally agree with you - it's pathetic. However, I'd ask that you don't squeeze out the educated analysis that we still do get here. These cameras cost a small fortune. They deserve to be subject to the closest scrutiny, including pixel-peeping (I'm spending £X grand on a camera - I want to know these things!) I know the Can/Nik trolls are idiots. I know that photography is about "getting out there". What I don't know is the fine detail about this camera's performance.

I can't understand this war (Canon vs. Nikon). Really, people will use astronomic ISO? Really, the most of people use up to 6400 iso. I don't need iso 204800, or even 12800. Shot what I can't see? No, really, I'm a photographer not a researcher.

Somehow I think the pros who make a descent living from their photography will not find the D4's ISO capabilities a hindrance to their ability to deliver pro results. A lot of people on here just need to go out and start making photos instead of fretting over a camera's specs night and day. I promise you'll be a lot less stressed if you stop worrying about whether or not you have a better camera or lens than everyone else.

Maybe I am crazy but I see red color blotches even at ISO 200. The D3s seems much clean at all ISO settings, blacks are black and color blotches start only at very high ISO.The D4 looks like an entry level DSLR at low-medium ISO's.

I also use a lot of Canon gear when issued to me, and I am looking forward to trying out the very well speced 1Dx. I am sure that it'll be a great camera as well and be well up to the great standard that Canon produce in their pro line of cameras. Looking forward to the 5DIII as well with the new AF. As popular and important that the 5DII was, the dodgy AF was always bit hard to accept. The IQ was great, so even if left as it was, it'll be a great improvement. A soft, slightly out of focus image is no good no matter how low noise or perfectly coloured your image is.And importantly, Nikon in this new release has kept the prices reasonable. That is to say that it is not heaps more expensive that the D3s. In fact I'm sure by the time it is readily available, it'll be pretty much be the same price.

The D4 is fine as a replacement for the D3s. Having come from the earlier D1x, thru to D2x/H, D3 and now with D3s, I see it as a good new model in the line. A small improvement in the MP while also slightly improving the incredibly great AF and low light ISOs that the D3s has.

There are also masses of new improvements that Nikon have included that alot of naysayers have not even considered, but for a camera that most of us have to use on a daily basis, those improvements are very useful to the handling of the camera and also to our workflows. Being able to shoot super clean images at 25,000 ISO is not the only thing that makes a camera great. A professional camera is one that has to be good to hold and use daily, sometimes for long hours, easy and intuitive to control and of course, be reliable. Of course, Image Quality is important too, but at this top end of the industry, I doubt that either Canon or Nikon would release a complete lemon!

The Imaging Resource has a more comprehensive set of D4 sample pics out there.Worth comparing. (and they use more consistent lense/F data than was the case in the DPR sample)

After you look at it you find the same we saw here, but in a wider variety of sample shots

1. No difference in IQ AT all2. The picture quality when you zoom in and make objects the same size on a canvas of equal size is IDENTICAL - i.e. there is no higher resolution/quality from a crop with the 16mp sensor. (disappointment!)

So, whatever the benefits are, they appear to be limited to much better video and a bunch of refinements like back lit buttons, slightly improved ergonomics and so on.

When the light get really low Nikoners will pack up their gear and head home. Once home they will find a comfy corner, curl up into a little ball so to cry themselves to sleep. Night night sleep tight. :P

Canon marketing must love people like you who passionately support their camp. Why you would love to love them is beyond me. Maybe I don't understand because I prefer to spend time developing my own work rather than watching from the sidelines which brand is the current heavyweight champion of the camera world.

These Canon/Nikon comparisons are quite interesting, but I find generally of limited practical applicability. Most of us have made a system choice long ago and are now vested in lenses. Few if any would give up that gear, switch bodies, and buy set of new lenses...

seems to me its a constant tug of war between the two manufacturers, each one being on top for some time.

It is clear that who ever master these 4 things will win the war. The lens technology, Sensor technology, Digital Signal Processing (DSP also its SW) and its Marketing. The last 3 are even more important than the first. See how quickly Samsung and Sony are catching up in photography! 30 years ago they were just purely electronic. And Samsung were still an OEM.For us, the only thing we can do is to advance our photography skill. Then, any equipment in our hand will do the same.

You're absolutely right.I switched to Sony because I'm a tech head.Many of the things Sony offers are a little gadgety but I love them.Does that make me a better photographer?No, not at all. But I enjoy it more which is the only thing that matters to me.Everybody should find the brand he's happy with.

No, the one that masters connectivity, will win. Both Nikon and Canon masters your 4 points well enough already, but the one that masters connectivity to the internet and different agencies best, will win, because these photographers will sell more pics. The same of course applies for wedding photographers, where an assistant, which doesn't even have to be on site, can fetch and edit pictures and video in realtime from the camera and produce content that the guests can bring with them before leaving.... or that is available on facebook or whatever the next day...or is viewable on a large screen on site dureing the event in question...

Definatly. A D700 with my iPhones connectivity capabilities would open so many real oppurtunities to make more money from my business, much more so than a 36 MP D800. I don't undestand why the big players fail to realise some simple facts of our near future: 98% of all still images will be viewed on screen and transfered by web, thus super high resolution and IQ should be a secondary feature; people growing up today are impatient. They never had to wait for a photo lab to develop their film rolls and they don't want to wait even a couple of days for their wedding pictures, they want them right away. The first actor that brings a camera like this to market wins right out. It's been shown time and time again tha big corps who fails to do the right thing can and will be overthrown by small actors doing it right.

It is very funny to read how Canon funboys are trying to prove, that Canon is not loosing the game, by comparing D4 with D3s. The only thing they omit, that both D4, D3s humiliatingly destroy all Canon's which are present on the test.

Anyway even if D4 is worse than D3s, the difference is so tiny, that it does not have any practical significance.

The reason people compare the D4 to the D3S is because the D3S has set the stanndard for high ISO excellence...

The fact of the matter is that they don't "destroy" anything... using your logic one should also assume that the D3S sales trounced the 1D Mark IV ... which you, me and everybody else knows is not true...

You're constantly comparing a full frame sensor (D3S or D4) with a 1.3 crop factor sensor (1D Mark IV) ... to gain bragging rights about their ISO prowess... If thats seems like a fair comparison to you... by all means brag away...

The true test will be between the Canon 1D X & 5D Mark III ... In all probability the Nikon D800 will have APS-C level ISO performance at ISO 3200 and above... so one wouldn't really consider it a contender for anything other than resolution...

There is no denying that the D4 seems like a good all round camera... but its not going to set any precedence as far as low light photography goes...

The D4 only looks better in the eyes of a Nikon fanboy... I don't know what people are looking at... or how they are trying to justify this mediocre performance by the D4 at high ISO's...

I cannot figure out where this supposed detail retention is in the D4 at ISO 6400 and above... It is generously smearing fibres, cloth patterns with finely tuned sharpenning trying to compensate for detail retention... and is clearly distorting the levels of pigment saturation...

Look at that colour chart as a prime example of a smudge fest... the D3S one looks almost perfect at ISO 6400 maintaining the squares in geometric symmetry... But the D4 sample looks like a polychromized semblance of an indistinct square with a "smooth" appearance.

But the fact still remains that numerous people across the board are realizing that the D3S is still top dog as far as high ISO is concerned...

There are only two legitimate contenders for the High ISO crown now... the Nikon D3S and the upcoming Canon 1D X.

One more thing... based upon the sample images i've seen & scrutinized... even the Canon 5D Mark III will give the D3S & D4 a run for their money... and probably come up trumps against the D4 throught the ISO scale...

@lensberg Can't figure out where the superior detail/per pixel sharpness at ISO 6400 and up? See the "Eastman Kodak Company, 1997" on the Kodak Greyscale Chart. On the D4 this text is clearly legible, on the D3s, barely. Not enough evidence? The queen of hearts. And this from a pre-production D4.

As far a 5D Mk III, you can say it all you want, but based on Canon Europe mediocre samples and what we know about the sensor technology of Nikon vs. Canon, I would wonder why you would.

I don't understand the debate. It's like asking any breakthrough product to have another breakthrough when it gets upgraded. It doesn't happen that way. The D4 is evolutionary at roughly equivalent IQ to the D3S. A decision was made clearly to have the output have more detail with slightly more noise at ISO 6400.

You get one of these because you need a full frame, integrated grip camera either for the new video feature or you are a photog with fast moving subjects and you shoot outdoors a lot. The upgrades in buffer, frame rates, weather sealing, etc. are nice.

As for Canon vs. Nikon, the issue is whose system are you already invests in.

The colour noise on the d4 is blown up more, because of the larger zoom factor(colour noise is not a single pixel, but a group of pixels). The difference is not really noticeable when you scale the images to the exact same size. Also the d3s image has much more softness on the sides en corners, so nothing there can really be used for comparison.

@ marike6 - I agree with your assessment that there are certain aspects in the test image that are reproduced better by the D4. Actually i was referring to the coloured squares on the left side of the chart...

Looking at the Kodak colour chart in its entirety, it is abundantly obvious that the Nikon D3S produces a crisper, sharper and a more faithful image than the D4.

Look at those little furry balls on top of the chart... the purple & red ones in particular... you can clearly distinguish the intricate fibres on each of them... by comparison the D4 produces a much more muted and artificial looking image...

Now look at the white-grey-black spectrum at the bottom of the chart... you can clearly see the differentiating definition that the D3S is able to achieve whilst progressing from dark grey to black... In the D4 sample... there is virtually no difference in the shades of back towards the end of the spectrum... and there is only a faint trace of individual borders visible...

Regarding the "Eastman Kodak Company, 1997" you mentioned... compare it against the Canon G1 X and look at the result... the grey is much better reproduced by the G1 X and the text is equally as well rendered...

Now at the same setting of ISO 6400 scroll over to the "KODAK Grey Scale"... and look at the quality of the Canon G1 X image... the grey background is cleaner & the text is much sharper...

@lensberg – I don't see what you're seeing. For the colour and greyscale charts the D3s and D4 are basically on par with each other. But i areas mentioned the D4 edges out slightly. Also check the Martini bottle, paperclips and the 'Tin Light'. I'm looking at ISOs above 6400 BTW.

I think the D3s 's DOF is slightly shifted forward and D4's slightly backward. Better said, one front focuses slightly the other back focuses slightly with the same lens. That's pretty evident (at least to me it is)

the pixels are 34% smaller in area. so if signal qualities are about the same at pixel level that will mean more than 0.4 stop improvement of image quality besides better resolution. Nikon says near 1 stop and I understand it as better sensor + better NR.

Sensor efficiency is at about the same level with both these cameras. Its going to be pretty hard to make a quantum leap, or any leap, with current tech. I would think if you have a D3s with lower shutter count, don't shoot much video, and are happy with the AF, you don't upgrade. Of course, If you don't have a D3s, the d4 for roughly the same price is a no brainer. Canons up next, looking forward to the reviews. I wonder if they managed to increase their sensor efficiency to the level of the D3s-d4.

I thought The 5D2 really held its own pretty well in this test, especially in the lighter areas of the test. it lost it in the shadows and blacks, at higher ISO, but the extra resolution seemed to help. Waiting to see if the text on the bottom of the watch dial can actually be read with the d800. I'm thinking yes.

it's almost impossible to get the same exposure for different cameras. that's why most of my tests are through a single piece of Nikkor, not a very good one, for both Nikon and Canon bodies. but still I have no way to control shutter (I can set them to the same value though).

The D4 advantages for photographers (assumes you want an integrated grip 100% of the time you need full frame):

1. You won't be able to buy a D3S except used. So if this is your first FF camera with integrated grip...2. Higher MP, especially useful for cropping. You must crop? A crooked hand held shot. Extra room for distortion management for a lens or to tilt a building up straight. A critter that is too hard to approach closely.3. 10 fps for 10 seconds. Shoot anything that moves quickly? Sports. Wildlife.4. Improved weather sealing for the outdoor shooter.5. An XQD card with faster write speeds (eventually).6. Weight savings vs. the D3S.7. Under realistic shooting conditions, more shots per battery charge (5500 Nikon test vs. 2600 CIPA).8. A chance to have a good video recorder around for special trips. Maybe not a reason to buy this, but it will come in handy.

Wow reading these comments it makes me think many were expecting miracles. Lets face it, the D3s is hard act to beat when it comes to noise preformance. The thing is Noise preformance isn't the only thing to consider when choosing a body. So what if the D3s and the D4 have similar or the same IQ? The D3s had class leading image quality and if the D4 is the same but with more megapixels what is there to be disappointed about? It's not like everyone has been thinking "gee I wish the D3s had better noise preformance."

The D4 has many other improvements over the D3s to make it a worthwhile successor even if the image quality is only slightly better or the same. You have to look at the whole camera not just one aspect that really didn't need improving anyway.

I've got 2 of these on order and I have to confess that these test shots are making me think twice. From what I can make out, the images seem better on the D3s above 6400 (which is where I usually find myself). In real terms the D3s is truly excellent - I was expecting the D4 to be at least as good. Not sure what to do now as 2xD4 is a lot of money to waste!!

What's your application? I am getting more detail out of the D4 files at ISO 12800 vs. the D3s. Maybe not enough for real world. But I am getting no worse with 4 MP more. For my bird photography, the ability to crop more is huge. Also the D4 essential comes with an installed buffer upgrade for those of us who need high frame rates. 10 seconds of 10 fps shooting is huge.

My application is in dance and performance and it is low light and at high speed. The D3s is a good camera! Any improvement would be a real help, but any degradation would also be noticeable so I am exercised about the possibility of the D4 not performing as well as the D3s. If it delivers the same image quality / noise / colour rendition etc. at 12800 or 25k and beyond then I would be happy. I expect it to focus better and the overall ergonomics to also be improved.

Bottom line - Improved focus with same high ISO as D3s would make me happy - i'm not looking for miracles, just a modest improvement at the extremes.

if you play with the raw files in NX, an play with noise reduction and saturation and and part. sharpness, it seems to me you can "get a bit more out of the D4" raw file. But again, the differences are REALLY small.

The Nikon D4 is essentially an overhyped camera... but i suppose that was to be expected considering the fact that it was propped up prematurely to assume the high ISO crown from the D3S.

Considering the fact that there is a 2½ year time span between the D3S & D4 ... Nikon seem to have made virtually no advances regarding ISO performance...

Just look at that furry patch that resembles tiger skin at ISO 6400 on the D4 and you'll notice severe ammounts of noise reduction at work... blurring out the fine textures & fibres completely... by contrast the D3 & Canon 1D Mark IV manage to preserve the textures whilst delivering a natural looking image...

The intricate pattern on the green & purple fabric is totally smeared out by the D4 though funnily the white cross fibres remain intact ... Now compare it to the D3s sample which is excellent... even the 1D IV manages to retain more detail...

The green & purple clothe, smeared out it is not. The Queen of Hearts at ISO 6400, the D4 is much sharper that all the others, and in general it has the best balance of clean IQ high ISO and sharpness/detail. Overhyped? With uncompressed HDMI out, class leading high ISO performance, high fps, etc. Doesn't sound like hype to me. Sounds awesome.

awesome yes if you never had a d3s. If you do, you feel limited progress has been made (outside the video). All around D4 is a much better tool than D3S, but clearly we all had hoped to not just get D3S + Video and a few more ergonomic buttons after 2.5 years.

You must be looking at the JPEGs, the NEFs tell a completely different story. The D4 retains quite a bit more detail and better color accuracy than the DS3, pretty much across the board, and is comparable in noise when viewed at the same resolution.

Looking at the 1D Mark IV, though, I'd say there's not much to choose between the D4 and 1D Mark IV, given appropriate noise reduction and sharpening, etc.

@Henry H. Hertz Video freaks? aside, you must be quite a talented photographer if the D4 is not a good enough camera for you. Where can we see your work? What camera do you presently use?

Simply "on par" with the 3 others it is not, however. It completely outperforms the 2 Canons as expected and is equal or better than D3s at high ISO with higher resolution and better edge sharpness. Not sure what you're seeing below ISO 6400...and I'm not sure I care.

Henry H. Hertz is just a canon fanboy drunk on koolaid. Just look at his comments on the 5D3 news posts. He is down right abusive to many who dared criticize his beloved Canon or who disagrees with him.

@Jexmark yes, you are rigth. For some reason I thought it was a pre production D4. Well, that settles it for me then: the IQ is not better than that of the D3s (it has some extra features though that can make it a compelling upgrade for a lot of people).

It seems to me that the D4 is better than any other of it's competitors, but we are yet to see samples from the Canon 1D-X. Then again, if I had a D3s I doubt I'd buy it... A different thing would be if I came from an older model, like the D3 or if wanted to jump from a lower category. Still, I think there's room in the market for a "baby D4" (16Mp, FF, around 8-9fps, in a lighter D800 body). Nikon should understand that in these times of economic slump not every photojournalist can spend 6000$ in a pro-body.

My net conclusion: I am disappointed. The core IQ has essentially NOT improved over D3S

1. Comparison of raw file at ISO 100Across the frame, the IQ is virtually the same. Some truly marginal differences, though:- D4 has a tiny bit higher resolution, but it seems to depend on color of object whether this is visible. The reds seem cripser- However, D3S seems to have slightly more saturated colors.- D4 resolves text marginally higher, but you really have to look closely at a 300% magnification to say "I think there is a small difference"

2. At ISO 6400 -- which is the upper limit I am shooting atIn the center of the image, there are NO, absolutely no differences.At the margin, towards edges , D4 resolves letters a bit clearer Likely, that this is not a sensor issue but a result of shooting D4 at F11 and D3S at F8.

BUUHHH

The Plus of D4 : A bunch of new features & video -- some of which will only be useful for a small subset of pros.

Just did the same for 102400 ISO. SAME result - No difference. Except, D3S picture had some yellow dots in some areas.I also downsampled the D4 to same size as D3S. Whatever differences there are, they are soooo minor that I have to say "Nikon after 2.5 more years, REALLY?"Again, some features have definitely improved and they will make for a more pleasant pic taking. I have D4 and D800E on order, and will leave them open for now awaiting more tests, but for now I am a bit sad !!

Maybe/probably D4 will have better DR, and the load of new technology especially for video is THE reason to buy D4 instead of D3s (and not the improved SNR) P.S. maybe we have reached the limits of CMOS technology with D3s in therms of noise performance

@ Josh -- I guess my point was I almost dont see any evidence of more resolution. Its almost invisible, and visible only at like 300% in certain color channels.So yes, D4 is a great camera -- just not a step up from D3S in terms of IQ.

I assume that like the Nikon D3s and D700, the D4 will shoot directly into Tiff.

Any chance of DPReview doing the test setup shot as tiffs and then posting those tiffs for download? Yes, I get that the test scene doesn't contain much in the way of subtle color or subtle shading. But tiffs are better than jpegs.

Oh, I didn't realize the X-Pro 1 shot at 10fps, had a huge RAW buffer, one of the best AF systems available, and a big selection of super telephoto lenses. I'll have to look at the press release again, because that's what it would need to put it on my radar as an alternative to the D4.

Oh wait, actually even if it had all that it wouldn't be an alternative, because I'm not one of those nuts who switches systems every time a new body comes out. In fact the only cameras I'm worried about comparing the D4's performance to are other Nikons, because that's what I use. How it compares to Canon really isn't relevant to me because I'm not going to sell an entire system of pro lenses, flashes and accessories because some non-photographers think another totally unrelated camera, that absolutely can't fill the same role, might have higher image quality. Remember, for the people who actually uses these cameras to take pictures, absolute image quality is just one of many important factors.

I use canons but I admire the D3s.Even more the D4.However, I have never seen better files than the sigma on a small dslr.Im also not fond of the sigma body, I m not convinced, but the IMAGE QUALITY... more to the medium format side today !!!

You must be delusional or by "big boys" you aren't referring to the D4. Side by side, the D5100 is noticeably worse than the D4 even at ISO 200. Some colors (magenta, purple) are horrid even at 100 on the D5100. If you're by chance looking at jpeg instead of raw, you might also want to note the loss of detail in the D5100's NR.

The Nikon 85 f1.8 is renowned for its sharpness at all apertures. With the Nikon 85 f1.4 you are paying all that extra money for its faster speed (and possible better build). In terms of optical quality there really is no difference between the lenses. dpreview could have tested the D4 with the 50mm f1.8 which costs £100, another fine quality lens renowned for is optics. Price of the lenses isn’t the issue here.

IMO, given the ISO capabilities of today's cameras, especially the D4, there is really no reason to shell out $1700 more for the 85 1.4 unless you shoot in conditions where the nano coating would be helpful. And since the 50 1.4 doesn't even have the nano coating there is no reason at all to buy it over the 50 1.8 The only exception is if you want/need the slightly shallower DOF for some reason.

+1 above. It is not only the price, lens making is a compromise of many factors. If you have a 1.4 glass, more likely, it is designed for apertures near that which has a very limited depth of field. On the D4, they used f11 for more DOF which, IMO, is better with the 1.8.There is a 85mm macro lens but only for the DX.

@ Bookie -- I think they tested this with the new lense that came out about 1-2 weeks ago, not the old 1.8. So the new one is not yet "known for its sharpness" although its hard to see why the new one would be worse than the old one...

BTW I have that new lense, and tested it against the 70-200mm F2.8 at 85mm. I did not find any discernible differences in IQ so far (obviously 1.8 gives a bit different possibilities, but you can get even better bookeeh at 2.8 if you zoom to 200mm i.m. humble opinion). The main benefit vs. the 70-200 is weight/size

@jwalker019You're right, but the Nikon MTF chart for each lens is based on the value at the maximum aperture of the lens.At f/11 Nikon 85/1.8 G lens has nearly 3200 resolution value,Nikon 85/1.4 G lens has nearly 3450 resolution value.I would prefer 85/1.4 G (less vignett. and chr. aberr.).

The D3s is clearly better than this pre production D4. There is no question about that. It's amazing. Really amazing: only 4 extra MP and 2 years later and (according to this samples) Nikon haven't figured out how to improve over the D3s.

I think we are seeing Exspeed processor differences and software in the JPEGS, giving a lot more detail and slightly more noise in the D4. The JPEG workups in camera RAW give huge differences that will matter to a bird photographer. That said, until Adobe updates camera RAW, I cannot evaluate the RAW images.

Thank you, as I specified, I was commenting on the trialware version of Capture NX2 (Windows 7 64 bit and checked for updates).

Good to be assured that at least the version one purchases and then successfully updates will open D4 NEF files.

Are you using Windows or Mac?

I guess I could go out and buy the disc tomorrow, install the software and update it, but that seems silly since I own Photoshop CS and it will get updated, soon I'd bet. So I don't really need Capture NX v2 for my purposes.

Though I wish that Nikon USA would add 2.3.1 as the trialware option. I checked and the trialware is version 2.3.0.

As for all these people who think the D3s is better, if you either just shoot Jpeg, or can't figure out how to get the most out of RAW, by all means keep thinking it's better and don't buy the D4, it will cut down on the waiting list. It's pretty damn clear that you can get more out of the D4 files in NX2.

More about gear in this article

NASA astronaut Jeff Williams posted a video detailing some of the equipment he uses to capture Earth from the ISS. So what kind of specialized gear does one use in space? Turns out the crew uses 'regular photography equipment' like the Nikon D4. Read more

It's telling that DPR regular Christopher Michel corresponded about this piece while en route to Antarctica. He considers freelance photography his third career, one that has taken him to the proverbial ends of the earth and beyond. From a U-2 spy plane to the North Pole, he's searched all over for stories and images that inspire. See some of his work here and find out more about him in our Q&A. Read more

Laurent Baheux began in photography as a sports writer and photojournalist before a safari to Tanzania in 2002 changed his life. There he fell in love with photographing the exotic animals of Africa, preferring a fine art approach that gives his wildlife images a portrait-like quality. Read more

With nearly thirty years of photography as well as almost ninety countries under his belt, travel, editorial and reportage photographer Mark Edward Harris has dedicated his eye to capturing life. His career in photography began as a still shooter for the Merv Griffin Show, but it was a four month trek through Asia when the show ended that first ignited his true love; travel photography. Read more about Harris' photography as well as his tips on traveling light in our Q+A. See gallery

Nikon has posted firmware updates for a number of its DSLRs. Updates for the D600, D800, D4, D3s, D3x, D3, D7000 and D3200 include support for the AF-S Nikkor 800mm f/5.6E FL ED VR lens. The D600 and D800 see an improvement to the subject tracking performance in continuous autofocus mode when shooting using the optical viewfinder. And the D600 can now deliver 100% video scene coverage via HDMI output. The updates are available for immediate download from Nikon's website. Click through for a full list of feature updates, bug fixes and download links.

Latest in-depth reviews

Panasonic's premium compact DC-ZS200 (TZ200 outside of North America) boasts a 24-360mm equiv. F3.3-6.4 zoom lens, making it the longest reaching 1"-type pocket camera on the market. There are tradeoffs that come with that big lens, however. Find out all the details in our in-depth review.

The Hex Raven DSLR bag holds a ton of gear and employs a low-profile design that doesn't scream "I'm a camera bag." We think it's a little too bulky for everyday use, but makes for a great option when traveling with a lot of gear.

The Sony a7 III sets a new benchmark for full-frame cameras thanks to its compelling combination of value and capability. It's at home shooting everything from sports to portraits, and is one of the most impressive all-around cameras we've seen in a long while. Find out all the details in our full review.

Latest buying guides

What's the best camera for a parent? The best cameras for shooting kids and family must have fast autofocus, good low-light image quality and great video. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for parents, and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for shooting landscapes? High resolution, weather-sealed bodies and wide dynamic range are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting landscapes, and recommended the best.

What’s the best camera costing over $2000? The best high-end camera costing more than $2000 should have plenty of resolution, exceptional build quality, good 4K video capture and top-notch autofocus for advanced and professional users. In this buying guide we’ve rounded up all the current interchangeable lens cameras costing over $2000 and recommended the best.

What's the best camera for taking pictures of people and events? Reliable autofocus, good image quality in low light, and great colors straight from the camera are all important. In this buying guide we've rounded-up several great cameras for shooting people and events, and recommended the best.

The new HP DesignJet Z6 and Z9+ supposedly offer "the fastest printing capabilities available on the market today," all while using fewer ink tanks, and featuring useful add-ons like a built-in vertical trimmer.

In an effort to streamline production and minimize confusion, RED has announced that it is simplifying its product lineup to three main cameras. As an added bonus, this change dramatically drops the prices for all three options.

Fujifilm's new X-T100 is an SLR-style mirrorless camera that takes the internals of the X-A5, including phase-detect AF, and adds a fully articulating LCD and high-res OLED viewfinder. The X-T100 is priced at a very reasonable $599/€599 body-only and $699/€699/£619 with a 15-45mm lens.

Panasonic's latest firmware update for its GH5S, GH5 and G9 series of cameras was leaked in Japan earlier today and is now being officially announced a week early. But don't get too excited – you still won't be able to download it until May 30th.

We've been saying for years that the term "lens compression" is misleading, but Lee Morris over at Fstoppers has put together a useful video that explains why this is the case, and demonstrates it with two easy-to-understand examples.

Last week, some 'leaked' photos were published online that purported to show a DJI Phantom 5 drone with interchangeable lens camera and several prime lenses. The rumor was widely reported, but DPReview has learned that those images do not, in fact, show a Phantom 5 at all.

Award-winning fashion and celebrity photographer Markus Klinko recently tested out the Godox EC-200 flash extension head. Actually, he tested out four of them, creating a quad-flash ring light alternative that works great for both beauty and close-up work.

According to a recent investor presentation, Sony intends to occupy the top slot in the overall camera market by the end of 2020, beating back Canon and Nikon by boosting its interchangeable lens systems.

Google has finally added the ability to mark your favorite images in Google Photos, so they can be filtered into a dedicated album. The service is also planning to a social network-like "heart" button that lets you like other people's photos.

We've been messing around with Apollo, an iOS app that allows you to add 3D lighting effects to images using depth information, and have to say we're impressed with what it's capable of – but that doesn't mean we don't have a few requests for the next version.

The new lightweight laptop packs a whole lot of photo- and video-editing punch. The laptop can be specced out with a Core i9 processor, 16GB of RAM, 1TB of SSD storage, NVIDIA graphics with 4GB of GDDR5, and a 4K display with 100% Adobe RGB coverage.

It looks like Canon is getting into sensor sales. The three specialized CMOS sensors the company recently demoed—including a 120MP APS-H model and an ultra-low light sensor—have been listed for sale through a distributor in the US.

Kodak Alaris has launched a new single-use disposable camera in Europe. Called the Kodak Daylight Single Use Camera, this 800 ISO film camera is supposedly ideal for parties, weddings, and similar events.

Computer vision company Lucid and cinema camera maker RED have partnered to create an 8K 3D camera that can capture 4-view (4V) holographic images and video in real-time. The camera is designed to work with RED's upcoming holographic Hydrogen One smartphone.

If Canon and Nikon do get into high-end mirrorless, it's almost certain that they'll do everything they can to maintain compatibility with their existing mounts. But, asks Richard Butler, wouldn't it be more interesting if they built a small, niche system to live alongside their existing DSLRs?

You know that feeling when you're already all suited up and out on a spacewalk outside the International Space Station, and only then do you realize you forgot to put the SD card in your GoPro? No? Us either... but one astronaut on the ISS sure does.

From 2015 to 2017, filmmaker Macgregor and his crew spend many months traveling back and forth on the famed Mauritanian Railway—the so-called 'Backbone of the Sahara—to document the grueling journey endured by merchants who regularly travel atop this train. This beautifully-executed short doc is the result.

Synology has added a new 6-bay NAS to its DiskStation+ series, and it's aimed squarely at photographers and medium sized businesses. The DS1618+ can handle up to six 12TB drives, giving it a max capacity of 72TB, or up to 60TB in RAID 5.

Our original gallery for Tamron's new 70-210mm F4 had portraits, slow-moving wildlife and city scenes, but was sorely missing fast action. We remedied that by photographing some motorcycles flying through the air.

This week on DPReview TV, Chris and Jordan prepare for the summer holiday season by putting several popular waterproof cameras to the test. If you're considering a rugged camera for the beach or pool this summer, or if you just want to see what a Chris and Jordan fishing show might look like, tune in.

Soulumination is a non-profit organization that provides life-affirming legacy photography to families facing serious medical conditions, completely free of charge. This video shares the work they are doing.

Fujifilm EU seems to have accidentally leaked an unreleased camera to the masses. The leaked page details a new "X-T100" camera that will share most of its specs with the X-A5, but includes an EVF, deeper buffer, and 3-way tilting touchscreen.

LA-based director and cinematographer Phil Holland of PHFX recently joined forces with Gotham Film Works to create something out-of-this-world. Using a special aerial camera array, Holland shot a flyover of New York City using not one, not two, but three 8K RED Weapon Monstro VistaVision cameras.